Issues, Challenges and Opportunities for Economic Evaluations of Orphan Drugs in Rare Diseases: An Umbrella Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are significant challenges when obtaining clinical and economic evidence for health technology assessments of rare diseases. Many of them have been highlighted in previous systematic reviews but they have not been summarised in a comprehensive manner. For all stakeholders working with rare diseases, it is important to be aware and understand these issues. The objective of this review is to identify the main challenges for the economic evaluation of orphan drugs in rare diseases. METHODS: An umbrella review of systematic reviews of economic studies concerned with orphan and ultra-orphan drugs was conducted. Studies that were not systematic reviews, or on advanced therapeutic medicinal products, personalised medicines or other interventions that were not considered orphan drugs were excluded. The database searches included publications from 2010 to 2023, and were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane library using filters for systematic reviews, and economic evaluations and models. These filters were combined with search terms for rare diseases and orphan drugs. A hand search supplemented the literature searches. The findings were reported by a compliant Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty-two records were identified from the literature searches, of which 64 were duplicates, whereas five reviews were identified from the hand search. A total of 36 reviews were included after screening against inclusion/exclusion criteria, 35 from literature searches and one from hand searching. Of those studies 1, 27 and 8 were low, moderate and high quality, respectively. The reviews highlight the scarcity of evidence for health economic parameters, for example, clinical effectiveness, costs, quality of life and the natural history of disease. Health economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness and budget-impact analyses were scarce, and generally low-to-moderate quality. The causes were limited health economic parameters, together with publications bias, especially for cost-effectiveness analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlighted issues around a considerable paucity of evidence for economic evaluations and few cost-effectiveness analyses, supporting the notion that a paucity of evidence makes economic evaluations of rare diseases more challenging compared with more prevalent diseases. Furthermore, we provide recommendations for more sustainable approaches in economic evaluations of rare diseases.

Goal setting and goal attainment in patients with major depressive disorder: a narrative review on shared decision making in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: Narrative review of the processes of goal setting and goal attainment scaling, as practical approaches to operationalizing and implementing the principles of shared decision making (SDM) in the routine care of people living with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: We searched electronic databases for clinical studies published in English using key terms related to MDD and goal setting or goal attainment scaling. Two clinical studies of goal setting in MDD are considered in detail to exemplify the practicalities of the goal setting approach. RESULTS: While SDM is widely recommended for people living with mental health problems, there is general agreement that it has thus far been implemented variably. In other areas of medicine, the process of goal setting is an established way to engage the patient, facilitate motivation, and assist the recovery process. For people living with MDD, the concept of goal setting is in its infancy, and only few studies have evaluated its clinical utility. Two clinical studies of vortioxetine for MDD demonstrate the utility of goal attainment scaling as an appropriate outcome for assessing functional improvement in ways that matter to the patient. CONCLUSIONS: Goal setting is a pragmatic approach to turning the principles of SDM into realities of clinical practice and aligns with the principles of recovery that encompasses the notions of self-determination, self-management, personal growth, empowerment, and choice. Accumulating evidence supports the use of goal attainment scaling as an appropriate personalized outcome measure for use in clinical trials.

Shared decision making is a structured approach in which a doctor assists their patient in making informed choices about treatment that consider the patient's own preferences. However, while acknowledged as the ideal approach, many doctors working in the mental health area say it can be difficult to apply in their daily clinical practice. In other areas of medicine, such as physical rehabilitation, the structured process of patients setting treatment goals in dialogue with their doctor has been recommended as a practical way to put the principles of shared decision making into practice.In this paper, we reviewed the medical literature to better understand how goal setting can be used to improve the care of people with major depressive disorder. The available evidence supports goal setting as a powerful way to engage patients in healthcare decisions, and ultimately improve health-related outcomes. The goal setting process provides patients the opportunity to verbalize their own, tangible goals for treatment; and following some negotiation, receive endorsement of their goals from their doctor. Patients feel supported and are better motivated to continue with their treatment.While still in its infancy, the growing evidence base supporting goal setting for people with major depressive disorder is encouraging. For example, the Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) method of evaluating treatment success has been suitably adapted for use in people living with depression (GAS-D) and provides an easy, structured format for discussing personal treatment goals, as well as a method for tracking success, both in clinical practice and research studies.

Retrograde cerebral perfusion reduces embolic and watershed lesions after acute type a aortic dissection repair with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest.

BACKGROUND: To assess whether retrograde cerebral perfusion reduces neurological injury and mortality in patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, observational study including all patients undergoing acute type A aortic dissection repair with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest between January 1998 and December 2022 with or without the adjunct of retrograde cerebral perfusion. 515 patients were included: 257 patients with hypothermic circulatory arrest only and 258 patients with hypothermic circulatory arrest and retrograde cerebral perfusion. The primary endpoints were clinical neurological injury, embolic lesions, and watershed lesions. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of the primary outcomes. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: Clinical neurological injury and embolic lesions were less frequent in patients with retrograde cerebral perfusion (20.2% vs. 28.4%, p = 0.041 and 13.7% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.010, respectively), but there was no significant difference in the occurrence of watershed lesions (3.0% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.156). However, after multivariable logistic regression, retrograde cerebral perfusion was associated with a significant reduction of clinical neurological injury (OR: 0.60; 95% CI 0.36-0.995, p = 0.049), embolic lesions (OR: 0.55; 95% CI 0.31-0.97, p = 0.041), and watershed lesions (OR: 0.25; 95%CI 0.07-0.80, p = 0.027). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (12.8% vs. 11.7%, p = ns) or long-term survival between groups. CONCLUSION: In this study, we showed that the addition of retrograde cerebral perfusion during hypothermic circulatory arrest in the setting of acute type A aortic dissection repair reduced the risk of clinical neurological injury, embolic lesions, and watershed lesions.